1892.] Y. A. Smith —On the Civilization of Ancien t India. 
57 
33) that the Musee Guimet contains three modern figures of the ema¬ 
ciated Buddha. One of these is a fine Chinese bronze attributed to the 
last century. The others come from Japan, one being in wood, and the 
second in bronze, and are supposed to date respectively from the sixteenth 
and seventeenth centuries. All three represent the Buddha in a stand¬ 
ing posture. 
The second statuette figured is that of a woman standing, carrying 
on each shoulder a small standing figure, and suckling an infant, which 
sits astride, Indian fashion, on her right hip. The interpretation of this 
group is as yet unknown. Mr. Senart conjectures that the small figures 
on the shoulders may be intended to mark the divine rank of the prin¬ 
cipal figure, and that they are offering her a diadem or garland. Pro¬ 
bably the woman is Maya, the mother of the Buddha. The comparison 
with images of the Madonna Lactans is obvious, and is of interest when 
considered in connection with the numerous cases of resemblance between 
Buddhist and Christian works which I have cited. 
The last twenty-one pages of Mr. Senart’s essay are devoted to a 
discussion of the date of the Gandhara sculptures. His view is sub¬ 
stantially the same as that advocated by Sir A. Cunningham (page 149 
of my former 'paper '). The following passages express Mr. Senart’s 
general conclusions :— 
“ II est fort possible que la tradition de 1’ architecture et de la 
sculpture greco-buddhiques se soit au Nord-Ouest continuee pendant 
une periode plus ou moins longue. Un point cependant doit etre con- 
sidere comme etabli, c’ est que la periode de floraison et de grande 
expansion de cet art est anterieure a la seconde moitie du II e siecle ; que, 
des cette epoque, 1’ evolution dont il a ete 1’ initiateur dans 1’ iconogra- 
pliie buddhique etait achevee, consacree. It sera.it des lors bien arbi- 
traire en dehors de preuves positives qui n’ ont point ete produites, de 
ramener a une epoque plus basse les monuments principaux qui nous en 
sont parvenus, ceux surtout qui paraissent les plus caracteristiques et 
dont 1’ aspect est relativement ancien,” (page 42). 
The date of the statuette of the Emaciated Buddha is decided to be 
“not later than the end of the first century A. D.” (page 44). 
“ Pour la date, la premiere moitie du II e siecle parait marquer le 
moment ou 1’ imitation a ete la plus active, et il n’ y a aucune probabi¬ 
lity qu’ elle se soit prolongee tres-longtemps au dela. Si elle s’ etait 
exercee a une epoque plus tardive, posterieure a la grande floraison du 
buddhisme sous Kanishka et Huvislika, il est a penser qu’ elle ne serait 
pas si exactement circonstrite dans V art Buddhique” (page 52). 
When the passages quoted were written Mr. Senart had not seen 
my paper on the subject, and I shall therefore abstain from discussing 
H . 
